this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024
127 points (94.4% liked)

Technology

59495 readers
3050 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
127
The Cult of Microsoft (www.wheresyoured.at)
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by MajorHavoc@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Kind of an inflammatory title, but I like to let it match for accessibility.

I've been enjoying Ed Zitron's articles lately, because they call out CEOs who aren't doing their jobs.

I'm sharing this partly because I'm honestly surprised to see criticism of Satya Nadella's leadership. I think Satya has been good for Microsoft, overall, compared to previous leaders. And I was as convinced as anyone else when the "growth mindset" first hit the news cycle. It sounds fine, after all.

TL;DR:

  • Satya has baked "growth mindset deeply into the culture at Microsoft"
  • Folks outside of the original study authors have generally failed to reproduce evidence of any value in "growth mindset"
  • Microsoft is, of course "all in" on their own brand of AI tools, and their AI tools are doing the usual harmful barf, eat the barf, barf grosser barf, re-eat that barf data corruption cycle.
  • Some interesting speculation that none of the AI code flaunted by Microsoft and Google is probably high value. Which is a speculation I confidently share, but still, I think, speculation. (Lines-of-code is a bat shit insane way to measure engineer productivity, but some folks think it's okay when an AI is doing it.)
top 10 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] riskable@programming.dev 44 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Ahaha! Microsoft employees are using AI to ~~write~~ hallucinate their own performance reviews and managers are using that very same AI to "review" said performance reviews. Which is exactly the dystopian vision of the future that OpenAI sells!

What's funny is that the "cult of Microsoft" is 100% bullshit so the AI is being trained in bullshit and as time goes on its being reinforced with it's own hallucinated bullshit because everyone is using it to bullshit the bullshitters in management who are demanding this bullshit!

[–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's bullshit all the way down.

[–] Shadywack@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

I love this, best comment I've seen in a long time and couldn't agree more.

[–] mannycalavera@feddit.uk 21 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Ed knows how to write for his audience. He's a shock jock for the modern age.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Shock jocks don't typically include research though, or extensive background information, or very detailed descriptions.

Are there any shock jocks still out there? Who listens to drive time radio?

[–] mannycalavera@feddit.uk 2 points 2 weeks ago

They include "research" when it suits their argument. And speak in absolutes. No drive time radio isn't as popular as what it used to be... but he's using all the same tricks.

He sells controversy. That's his schtick.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

It's interesting to think how deep they've sunk into AI such that it may support the "growth mindset" psychobabble and that it may hose them for years.

Not that they won't be able to weather it, just that it'll take a bite out of them which was totally avoidable.

[–] heavy@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Lol uh I mean I don't think the author* is giving the generally normal people just working their job enough credit. In my anecdotal experience, the growth mindset stuff is just an excuse to say certain things at meetings, or make certain decisions, nobody is extremely bought in or anything.

In fact, I knew some folks that left Microsoft because of the growth mindset changes for more "old school" places like Boeing.

Generally speaking I think all these companies have some kind of cultish exterior, I can say this about Google, Apple, Amazon and Facebook for sure. If you're ever let inside the walls though, it's mostly regular people trying to live their lives.

[–] z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I'll push back a bit on this, though I generally agree with you. I've only worked for a small startup as my career in tech is still in its infancy, but in previous roles I've had in other industries, this cult like aspect of corporatism pervades to varying degrees.

That said, when I first started socializing and networking with those involved in the tech sector, I noticed that there definitely is a subsection of the tech industry predominated by those who, in my view, took the concept of "There's God In The Machine” thing way too far.

This subsection seems to be mainly populated by those who have only a passing understanding of the tech itself and don't actually write the code or architect the software. This subsection also seems to be populated by those who can code and do architect the software, but appear to me to have a selfish and shortsighted mindset reminiscent of stock traders and crypto bros, communities for which I personally have a particular disdain.

This obsession and claim that tech can do anything from save the world to destroy the planet is very dangerous as it is a perceived pseudo reality that many people, both with power and not, seem to be desperately trying to make real (mainly fueld by a fear of the future and a desire to have some semblence of control over it through power mongering and vacuuming up influence in the present).

And this problem of progress for its own sake with some ambiguous "tech will save us" mindset is only recently exacerbated by the claim that these chatbots are AI (IMHO making a mockery of the term, intelligence).

Additionally, among this subsection, there seems to be an almost ravenous push for AGI, which, whether a boon or blight on future generations of humanity, they tend to argue is an inevitable outcome because technological and economic progress can never be nor should be slowed or halted.

I have definitely encountered this sort of "progress at all cost" mindset in other industries, but never have I seen it so vehemently defended among a not insignificant subsection of an entire economic sector (tech). And I'd imagine it is particularly pronounced in the major FAANG companies.

If you follow Ed Zitron's other work, his recent articles and podcast episodes highlight a sort of "Villain of The Week" format, and so I don't think it's lost on him that this problem is not solely the purview of Microsoft, but rather is an indicator of a larger societal problem.

Indeed the issue Zitron is highlighting here is simply the newest incarnation of the strange cultish mantle that the Tech Industry can and has taken on in recent memory. The topic of Tech Work as Religion/Cult is thoroughly explored in the 2022 book, Work Pray Code: When Work Becomes Religion in Silicon Valley, by Carolyn Chen.